[PATCH i-g-t v4 1/2] lib/igt_kmemleak: library to interact with kmemleak
Peter Senna Tschudin
peter.senna at linux.intel.com
Wed Feb 12 14:57:09 UTC 2025
On 12.02.2025 14:41, Kamil Konieczny wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> On 2025-02-12 at 14:12:44 +0100, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12.02.2025 11:01, Zbigniew Kempczyński wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 10:18:17AM +0100, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> Resume: I prefer to wait until the initial feedback from CI and developers.
>>>> I will be happy to move this to runner later if we decide to not walk the
>>>> unknown road of trying to catch as many transient leaks as we can.
>>>>
>>>> That being said, let me know how to move forward.
>>>
>>> Question is to CI folks, for me this scan should be executed as
>>> dedicated CI run with kmemleak on. And I repeat - I don't see reason
>>> we should add this support to the tests, as few line script which
>>> wraps around test by kmemleak clear/scan is enough. We already have
>>> scripts directory so it is good place for such wrapper.
>>
>> So I am moving the code to the runner directory, and using printf() instead
>> of igt_warn(). Any other request for the series?
>>
>> [...]
>>
>
> or fprintf() or write() so you could write to a file instead
> of stdout, as stdout isn't collected now by runner itself (it
> goes to igt_runnerNN.txt but that is another story).
The errors in question here are exactly about writing to disk, so
I am positive that it only makes sense for them to go to stdout or
stderr. Are you ok with printing an error message instead of trying
to save to disk?
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list